Not My Brother . . .

[Taffy]

I just read an article about Clinton getting $150 MILLION deposited into his "foundation" (read tax shelter here) every time he meets with a foreign government now to make connections/introductions to secure oil rights for Big Oil. If it's true, why aren't they screaming about that

:faint:

:icon_flower:

[lightningfrommymouth]

:cloud9: I think the way he said it, probably set people off. As to his right to say it, absolutely. Christians are the only ones who have watch their p's and q's, I've noticed. There is so much discrimination towards them, it's not funny. In my own school system here, a kid can't take a bible on property, but a kid could and did take a Satanic bible on site. What's wrong with this picture?

I just read an article about Clinton getting $150 MILLION deposited into his "foundation" (read tax shelter here) every time he meets with a foreign government now to make connections/introductions to secure oil rights for Big Oil. If it's true, why aren't they screaming about that?  :2c:

Cardinal, I see the opposite where I live here in Texas. Very small town who still get away with forcing others to endure their own beliefs. Which happen to be Christian. The thing is though, there is a separation of church and state. If you want Christianity...or any other religion being taught, then it needs to be done in a private school. Not government run schools. This is all just my opinion of course.

I see this as relating to UR, because people who are turned off by Christianity see and hear these things like in this article, and it turns them off of God all together. I am currently trying very hard to heal the hurt a lot of people who feel Christians are bullies, not open minded, and they are in rebellion of God because of it.

[lightningfrommymouth]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41149562/ns/politics-more_politics/?gt1=43001

The Governor for Alabama . . .any red flags pop up as you read this article??

Nathan, I see red flags in this. I would be worried he was not looking out for his neighbor. I'm sure I don't need to quote scripture where our Christ gives the parable of who's your neighbor.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: I understand that different things happen in different States.

[Nathan]

This thread was on my mind quite a bit last night.  It occurred to me that the reason I personally felt there were some major red flags with the article is because this guy is not professing Christ AS MUCH as he is denouncing those that, in his eyes, need to know Chirst.  If he wants to pronounce Jesus . . .that's awesome . . . but he message was aimed at people who've fallen short . . .not illuminating anything . . .other than the fact that if you want to be my brother, you have to go through the right gate to get there. 

My message isn't about getting you to be my brother.  My message is Jesus is the Christ who's not only already finalized our destination, but we can also be enabled to "see" NOW how his kingdom works even though we're still exposed to the death experiences of this realm around us.

His intentions may have been good, but for me, it comes off as a negative, a slap in the face to those who we're supposed to lay our "selves" down for.  I still sense that rather than bring "pre-believers" closer to believers, his actions only solidified the wall between the two even more.

When I first posted this, I wasn't looking at the political side of it . . . didn't even realize it'd go there.  My point was concerning the outcome of what he said . . .spiritually, not politically. 

[Molly]

The thing is though, there is a separation of church and state. If you want Christianity...or any other religion being taught, then it needs to be done in a private school. Not government run schools.

We unfortunately have lost/are losing the difference between State and Feds, to our peril IMO, and this 'separation of church and state' does not apply to States.  What applies to States is whatever is in their State constitution.  Unfortunately again, States are now so dependent on Fed money that a case can be made that the State has to play ball with the Fed.

But it was never meant to be this way.  The States were meant to be a higher authority than the Fed and the individual a higher authority than the State.  You can see from the Ma State Constitution that there was no intention of any 'separation of church and state' by John Adams who was also one of the framers of the US Constitution.  That idea of separation of church and state is a modern idea started by those who do not want this to be a Christian nation.

Don't forget, these people understand what it means to train up children, just as much as the Founders did, which is why Founders such as John Adams wanted children given a Christian education, and they wanted the State to pay for it.  They felt that was the only way this country could survive and I think today we are seeing the wisdom of their position.

So the Gov of Alabama to my mind is sending a shot across the bow of those who would destroy the Christian heritage of this country.  And we see who is complaining about it--the far left--msnbc et al.  I have to imagine that he is reflecting the attitude of his State [or he is a fool lol] and therefore, this places him right squarely in the last battle being fought for freedom in this country--States rights.

If the States fail to secure their authority over the Fed, then the individual can kiss his God-given rights goodbye, because the Founders never intended a strong central gov't as they knew that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[lightningfrommymouth]

The thing is though, there is a separation of church and state. If you want Christianity...or any other religion being taught, then it needs to be done in a private school. Not government run schools.

We unfortunately have lost/are losing the difference between State and Feds, to our peril IMO, and this 'separation of church and state' does not apply to States.  What applies to States is whatever is in their State constitution.  Unfortunately again, States are now so dependent on Fed money that a case can be made that the State has to play ball with the Fed.

But it was never meant to be this way.  The States were meant to be a higher authority than the Fed and the individual a higher authority than the State.  You can see from the Ma State Constitution that there was no intention of any 'separation of church and state' by John Adams who was also one of the framers of the US Constitution.  That idea of separation of church and state is a modern idea started by those who do not want this to be a Christian nation.

Don't forget, these people understand what it means to train up children, just as much as the Founders did, which is why Founders such as John Adams wanted children given a Christian education, and they wanted the State to pay for it.  They felt that was the only way this country could survive and I think today we are seeing the wisdom of their position.

So the Gov of Alabama to my mind is sending a shot across the bow of those who would destroy the Christian heritage of this country.  And we see who is complaining about it--the far left--msnbc et al.  I have to imagine that he is reflecting the attitude of his State [or he is a fool lol] and therefore, this places him right squarely in the last battle being fought for freedom in this country--States rights.

If the States fail to secure their authority over the Fed, then the individual can kiss his God-given rights goodbye, because the Founders never intended a strong central gov't as they knew that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I was wrong. It's not in the constitution but,

" In the United States Constitution, the First Amendment, commonly mentioned as part of the Bill of Rights, states in part that: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Much later, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made broad strokes to prohibit discrimination based on religion or association with those of any religion. A key court case that helped further the concept of separation of church and state was the 1947 Supreme Court Case, Everson v. Board of Education, in which it was considered a misappropriation of funds to use school moneys to transport children to religious events. 1962 saw this separation extend further by prohibiting group prayer in school, especially as composed or organized by teachers or administrators."

I'm sorry but in my opinion this needs to stay the law. I see everyone, regardless of religion as my "brother and sister," if education is to be equal, there needs to be laws to protect against discrimination. Public schools are for the public, and private schools are where religion should stay-educationally speaking. I've seen too many people around me who go about as if Christians have the market on public schools. We don't. And it makes people of other religions resent us for thinking we do.

Can you clarify? DId you mean only Christians know what it means to raise up children? I wasn't sure what you meant.

I don't think they are sending a "shot across the bow," they are using language that is polarizing. As far as UR goes, I'm not sure how someone has this position and does not see that this doesn't build bridges, and turns those in rebellion off even more. My  :2c: of course.

[Molly]

" In the United States Constitution, the First Amendment, commonly mentioned as part of the Bill of Rights, states in part that: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Yes, this is the first amendment of the US Constitution.  This applies to the FED.

The Founders did not want the FED announcing a national religion, which at that time would be some flavor of Christianity.  In other words, they didn't want what they had in England, for instance, where the head of state, the king, was also the head of the Episcopal church.  When they said 'freedom of religion' they were thinking of different flavors of Christianity.  All of New England was founded by one group of people breaking off from a particular Christian church and setting up a new Christian church [and town] down the road.

That's the history of it.  The Founders never intended for it to be used as a club the way it is today to prevent Christian values from being taught in public schools.  Just the opposite, as I tried to show you with the Ma State Constitution written by John Adams.  John Adams wanted the State of MA to pay for Protestant education and he wrote it into the State Constitution.

Now, as I said, once the states start taking money from the Feds then these games can be played around what the State might want versus what the Fed can impose using the Fed constitution.  And, you begin to blur the lines between Fed and state until the Fed takes over.

I hope you and everyone will think about the Fed dictating to the states what they can and cannot do [as we see is happening now with health care and terrorist laws] and understand that this is a slippery slope into the tyranny that is produced by any strong central gov't, and which our Founders did everything possible to protect us from.

The tenth amendment:

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Unfortunately, I think we dropped down that slippery slope some time ago.

[Molly]

:cloud9: Unfortunately, I think we dropped down that slippery slope some time ago.

Yeah I'm fighting an uphill battle--particularly since people are so thoroughly brainwashed and they have not been taught history--

but, I'm used to dancing on ice. :happygrin:

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: :laughing7: It's true.

I can "see" what is happening, but I don't think many are going to wake up until we're completely overthrown; for many reasons, not the least of which, are complacency and unbelief. Giving all those billions to the "failing" banks, was essentially "looting" this country's assets, something that usually happens prior to a complete collapse. God help us all, I hope I'm wrong.  :sigh:

[thinktank]

According to the much loved Pat robertson  :winkgrin: he said that we have until 2012 to get out of personal debt, that the creditors will go hunting for their stake at this time, so be prepared to lose your house if one has huge debts, or be prepared to keep your house rather if in debt, by taking steps to eliminate it.

[lightningfrommymouth]

I don't think I can keep this on topic anymore as to how it relates to UR. And my politics to not align with a lot of you here  :mshock: so I think I stop this for now. I will add though that for a very interesting book on the history of the United States, (which in my opinion go better with UR views,) Howard Zinn's A People's History of The United States, is a great read.

[Molly]

I don't think I can keep this on topic anymore as to how it relates to UR. And my politics to not align with a lot of you here  :mshock: so I think I stop this for now. I will add though that for a very interesting book on the history of the United States, (which in my opinion go better with UR views,) Howard Zinn's A People's History of The United States, is a great read.

Howard Zinn is not without his charms, but when you see a historian saying he doesn't care about the past--you know you are dealing with a GATEKEEPER.

By their fruits, you will know them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WXU4eir-i8